Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 371. Somewhat dubious; the word is a nominal derivative of the verbal root ǂʼàm̋ "to (de)bark (tree, by pulling), strip (tree of bark)", and its meaning is more fully glossed as 'bark/rind (stripped off tree)'. Another potential candidate for this meaning is sòrő-b [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 123], but its meaning is glossed as 'peel, skin (of fruit), rind; rare bark', meaning that the word is no longer in active use to denote the bark cover of trees. The only other equivalent for 'bark' is ǀǀʼűú-b [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 244] 'periderm (of bark); (dry, dead) bark', clearly not eligible for inclusion. In [Krönlein & Rust 1969], the word soro-b is glossed as 'die Schale, die Rinde', with at least one important example (sac go ǂʼawi sorob ãsa ǀǀxuːs gumo "there is the thorn-tree whose bark you are peeling") that shows it could still be easily applied to 'tree-bark' in the XIXth century. It is not quite clear if a complete lexical replacement has taken place here over the last hundred years, but, following the indications in Haacke & Eiseb's dictionary, we prefer to postulate such a replacement for the moment.

Meinhof 1930: 90. Masc. gender. It is noted that a "better" equivalent is the compound expression hai-b soro-b ~ hai-b di soro-b, the first component of which is hai-b 'tree' q.v. Quoted as sorroː-b in [Wuras 1920: 12].

Proto-Khoekhoe:*soro-

Vossen 1997: 483 (*soro 'Schale/Schote' /'shell'/). Distribution: Seemingly preserved in !Ora, but only peripheral in Nama. Replacements: See notes on Nama for details; it is possible to suggest the diachronic semantic derivation/shift {'to strip, peel' > 'bark'}. Semantics and structure: Based on the semantics in Nama as well as external data, we reconstruct *soro- with a wider meaning than simply 'bark': rather any type of 'shell', 'cover', etc. In Proto-Khoekhoe, this word was lexically opposed to *ǀǀxʼũ 'periderm; dead bark' (this is the meaning still preserved in Nama). An alternate scenario is that *ǀǀxʼũ was the original 'bark', lost in !Ora and narrowed to 'dead bark' in Nama; this solution is indirectly corroborated by the basic meaning 'bark' for this root in Kalahari Khoe. However, the common meaning 'bark' for *soro- in old Nama and !Ora sources speaks against this. The complete optimal scenario would look thus: (a) Proto-Khoe *ǀǀxʼũ 'bark' > Proto-Khoekhoe 'periderm, dead bark'; (b) Proto-Khoe *soro- 'shell, cover' > Proto-Khoekhoe 'shell, cover, bark'; (c) Proto-Khoekhoe *soro- in the meaning 'bark' is once again replaced in Nama by *ǂʼam-.

Vossen 1997: 445 (Proto-Khoe *káí; for some reason, the Nama equivalent is missing in the source, which does not allow the author to postulate a Proto-Khoekhoe form). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 10. Masc. (àni̋-b) and fem. (àni̋-s) forms attested. Listed in the dictionary under the same entry as the verb àni̋ 'to decorate, adorn; colour in; dress up', but this is quite transparently a case of homonymy rather than polysemy (as is seen not only from semantic typology, but from external cognates as well: ani- 'bird' goes back to *xʼani-, whereas ani 'to dress up' reflects original *ani). Quoted as ani-b / ani-s in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 5].

Vossen 1997: 441 (*kxʼani). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (deletion of *xʼ- in Nama is predictable). Semantics and structure: This item goes back to Proto-Khoe *xʼani- 'vulture'; however, in both Khoekhoe languages already only the general meaning 'bird' is attested. The meaning 'vulture' in Nama is now expressed by the compound kai-ani-s (literally = 'large bird').

Vossen 1997: 422 (Proto-Khoe *pa). Distribution: Preserved only in !Ora. Replacements: Technically, it is impossible to reconstruct the Proto-Khoekhoe equivalent without external data; however, the majority of Kalahari Khoe languages reflect cognates of the !Ora word as primary equivalents for the meaning 'bite', and this unambiguously indicates that Nama n(d)a is an innovation, although its origins are unknown: it has no cognates either in !Ora or in Kalahari Khoe languages.

Vossen 1997: 425 (*ǀʼau). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are mostly regular. The diphthong -au in !Ora is somewhat unexpected, but the word is quoted by Meinhof after somebody else's records rather than his own, and the transcription may reflect a slight phonetic inaccuracy or represent an individual subdialect where *-ao > -au. In any case, Vossen's reconstruction should be amended based on external data (it would be strange to have Proto-Khoe *ǀʼao > Proto-Khoekhoe *ǀʼau and then revert to ǀʼao in Nama).

Not attested in either C. Meinhof's or C. Wuras' notes. The word ǂxō-b, cognate with the Nama word for 'bone', is only attested in the meaning 'kernel of fruit' [Meinhof 1930: 106] (= ǂʼuː-b id. [Wuras 1920: 30]).

Proto-Khoekhoe:*ǂxo- #

Distribution: Preserved in Nama; probably not in !Ora. Replacements: The situation in !Ora is unclear, since none of the sources actually indicate a precise equivalent for 'bone'. It is possible that the original term underwent the typologically plausible semantic shift {'bone' > 'kernel'} (cf. Russian косточка 'kernel of fruit', a diminutive of кость 'bone'); it is also possible that the word ǂxō-b simply happened to be unattested in the meaning 'bone' by both researchers. That the original meaning of *ǂxo- in Proto-Khoekhoe was 'kernel' rather than 'bone' is less likely from a general typological perspective. It is, however, also quite possible that the original Proto-Khoekhoe 'bone' was simply replaced in both languages, so the reconstruction in general is rather shaky.

Meinhof 1930: 91. Quoted as tʰam-xʼarri-b in [Wuras 1920: 15]. Obviously a compound, but its internal etymology remains obscure: tʰam may possibly be the same word as tʰam 'soft' [Meinhof 1930: 91] (?; the whole word actually refers to a male chest rather than female breast), but the morpheme -xʼarri- has no meaning of its own.

Proto-Khoekhoe:

Not properly reconstructible. The compound expression in !Ora remains without an internal etymology. The Nama word may certainly reflect Proto-Khoekhoe *ǀǀxai 'male breast, chest', but its only external confirmation is Naro ǀǀxáì 'breastbone', which is in itself not properly reconstructible for Proto-Kalahari Khoe (and is not even the most basic equivalent for 'male breast').

Meinhof 1930: 81. Slightly dubious; the meaning is glossed as 'anzünden', i. e. 'to light, set on fire'. (There is also a participial form, daũ-sa 'burning', with unclear nasalisation, attested in [Meinhof 1930: 123]). However, the only other equivalent with the meaning 'burn' is ǂʰūbī 'brennen' [Meinhof 1930: 103], corresponding to the intransitive 'burn' in Nama. It is obvious that dao is at least a transitive verb, whereas the transitivity of ǂʰūbī is dubious. C. Wuras also translates 'burn' as ǂʰuwi [Wuras 1920: 14], but, likewise, does not indicate whether the semantics is transitive or not. Therefore, at present we refrain from postulating a lexicostatistical discrepancy between Nama and !Ora based on this ambiguous evidence.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*dao

Vossen 1997: 500 (Proto-Khoe *dao). Distribution: Probably preserved in all dialects, although attestation in !Ora is ambiguous. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: It seems reasonable to set up an opposition of the transitive verb *dao and the intransitive verb *ǂʰubi for Proto-Khoekhoe, although only the former has reliable external parallels.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 221. Meaning glossed as 'cloud, raincloud, nimbus'. Fem.; the masc. counterpart ɳǀànű-b means 'rain; thunderstorm'. This Swadesh item displays significant dialectal variety. Haacke & Eiseb's dictionary lists ɳǀànű-s as the main equivalent for 'cloud' in Nama proper; additionally, (1) the word !ʼã̀ũ̋-s ~ !ʼã̀ũ̋-b is glossed as 'cloud' for the Damara dialect and as 'white cloud' for the Topnaar dialect [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 298] and (2) the word ǀǀʰàő-s is glossed as 'cloud' for the Haiǀǀom and ǂĀkhoe dialects [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 264]. In the older dictionary of Krönlein, ɳǀanu-s is glossed as 'cloud' [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 272]; the word ǀǀʰao is only attested in its verbal meaning 'to be covered with clouds (of sky)' [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 162]; and the equivalent of !ʼã̀ũ̋-s is not attested at all.

It may be speculated that the original word for 'cloud' in Common Nama must have been !ʼã̀ũ̋-s ~ !ʼã̀ũ̋-b, since this is the only term that does not show any semantics other than 'cloud' in the dialects where it is attested, whereas the other two could represent secondary shifts from either 'thunderstorm' or 'to be covered (of the sky)'.

Not reconstructible. The majority of stems that are attested with the meaning 'cloud' in Nama and !Ora show explicit signs of their recent origin in this meaning: (a) Nama ɳǀànű- 'cloud' has no parallels either in !Ora or in Kalahari Khoe, yet it is clearly the same word as Proto-Ju *ɳǀaʔa 'sky, heaven' (Juǀʼhoan ɳǀã̏ʔã̀, etc.); this suggests the possibility of an old loan from a North Khoisan source into some Nama/Damara dialects; (b) Nama ǀǀʰàő- is distributionally weak and may go back to a verb with the meaning 'to be covered, wrapped' (applied to the skies); (c) !Ora ǀʰum-ma is cognate with Nama ǀʰȍm̀m-i 'heaven, (sky)' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 204] and, considering that Meinhof himself notes the polysemy 'cloud / sky', the meaning 'sky' is probably primary. Only Nama !ʼã̀ũ̋- has no meaning other than 'sky' and cannot be suspected of being of areal descent; but this word, too, has a narrow distribution. On the whole, this situation agrees with the general Khoisan picture: the meaning 'cloud' is highly unstable in the area and usually converges with other meanings ('sky', 'rain', 'cover', 'sky-hair', etc.).

Meinhof 1930: 113. In [Wuras 1920: 15], the word 'cold' is rendered as ǂʼau-b, which is actually a noun and, furthermore, may be semantically inexact, since it corresponds to Nama ǂʼao-b 'dampness, dew'.

Vossen 1997: 458 (*ha). Distribution: Preserved in all (or most) dialects. Nama ǀxìi̋, although it behaves as a complete synonym according to dictionary sources, has no parallels in !Ora or in Kalahari Khoe, whereas *ha clearly goes back to Proto-Khoe. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 45. Quoted as ǀiː in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 238]. In both dictionaries, the two verbs are listed as complete or near-complete synonyms; a special study is required to better understand the difference. For the moment, we include both choices on the main list.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 172. Regular adjectival derivative from the verb ɳǂã̏ã̀ 'to become dry; dry up; wither'. The other word that is also listed in the dictionary in the meaning 'dry', ǀʼóò-sȁ [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 173], actually means 'barren' (of cow) and is not applicable to common situations of 'dryness'. Quoted as ɳǂã-sa in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 285].

Meinhof 1930: 94. Meaning glossed as 'dried up (of leaves); to be dry'. In [Wuras 1920: 20], two equivalents are listed: an odd word buʔona (accompanied with the note: "unverständlich, was gemeint ist"), and ǂʼoko, also not confirmed either in [Meinhof 1930] or through external comparison.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*ǀʼo

Vossen 1997: 497 (*ǀʼo). Distribution: Preserved everywhere, but with a semantic shift in modern Nama. Replacements: In Nama, the basic semantics of this word became narrowed down to 'be dry, barren, cease lactation', thus {'dry' > 'barren'}. Assumption of a reverse direction of semantic change is hardly acceptable based on typological evidence ('barren' as a figurative sub-meaning of 'dry' is common, but not vice versa) and external correlates, since the root *ǀʼo is also the common equivalent for 'dry' in Kalahari Khoe. The etymology of Nama ɳǂã̏ã̀ remains somewhat unclear, but it is quite possible that it is somehow connected (by means of an old contracted suffix?) with the tonally opposed ɳǂã̋ã́ 'to pour (out) water' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 172].

Vossen 1997: 474 (*ǂai). Distribution: Preserved in Nama. Replacements: !Ora ɳǀǀãũ-b is a nominal derivate from the corresponding verbal stem, thus {'hear' > 'ear'}; this is further confirmed by external data, proving that the Nama noun is a direct descendant of the Proto-Khoe equivalent for 'ear'.

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: This is a transparent derivate from the verbal root 'to see' q.v. (which is why there is no reference to [Vossen 1997], since Vossen only surveys the verbal forms), but the derivation must have taken place already on the Proto-Khoekhoe level.

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are generally regular, but the diphthong -ou- in !Ora remains problematic (it is encountered very rarely, and it seems more prudent to regard all such instances as accidental mistranscriptions of -au- based on individual phonetic variations). Semantics and structure: Considering the Nama evidence, it seems likely that this nominal stem is derived from the original verbal stem 'to be fat', although external evidence in Kalahari Khoe languages is lacking to confirm the original direction of derivation. In any case, there must have been a distinct opposition in Proto-Khoekhoe between *kau- 'solid fat' and *ɳǀǀui- 'liquid fat, oil' [Vossen 1997: 435].

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 234. Alternate synonyms ɡ!ȁnù-b and sui are noted in the dictionary for the Haiǀǀom and ǂĀkhoe dialects, but neither their origins nor their reliability is quite clear. Quoted as ǀǀʼou-b in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 324], where there is also a folk etymology attempt to derive the word from ǀǀʼàù 'thick, heavy' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 235] (that this is a folk etymology is clearly proven not only by the arbitrariness of the semantic link, but also by external comparison: 'fish' reflects Proto-Khoekhoe *ǀǀʼau and 'thick' reflects Proto-Khoekhoe *ǀǀxʼau).

Meinhof 1930: 115. Meinhof's own transcription is ǀǀàù-b with a zero efflux, but he also adduces the alternate variant with the glottalized efflux, transcribed by A. Engelbrecht, which he considers more correct in the light of external data. Masc. gender. Quoted as ǀǀʼau-b in [Wuras 1920: 23].

Proto-Khoekhoe:*ǀǀʼau-

Distribution: Preserved in most dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. R. Vossen does not list this reconstruction for the Proto-Khoekhoe level in [Vossen 1997: 436]; for some reason, he does not quote the Nama form at all, and only lists Meinhof's probably erroneous transcription ǀǀàù-b for !Ora. However, updated materials clearly show that *ǀǀʼau- is to be reconstructed for Proto-Khoekhoe the same way it should be reconstructed for Proto-Kalahari Khoe.

Meinhof 1930: 82. Quoted as doːi in [Wuras 1920: 25]; cf. also doi 'to emigrate' in the same source [Wuras 1920: 21] - most likely, the exact same word with pseudo-phonetic differentiation.

Proto-Khoekhoe:

Not properly reconstructible. !Ora doeː, provided its semantics is glossed accurately in the sources and does include the sub-meaning 'to fly (of birds, etc.)', is clearly a semantic innovation, being related to Nama dȍè 'to move (house); trek; migrate; fly (of missile), swarm (of bees)' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 32], and still further related to Proto-Khoe *toe 'to go away, pull away' [Vossen 1997: 505]; thus, there may have been a semantic shift {'to move out, migrate' > 'to fly'}. As for Nama ǀǀxànà, this form seems to be completely isolated in the language and finds no outside confirmation, although formally it is a better candidate for Proto-Khoekhoe status than its !Ora counterpart.

Vossen 1997: 503 (*ǀxʼoa). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (deletion of *-xʼ- in Nama is predictable). Semantics and structure: This is a verbal root ('to be full, to fill'), sometimes adjectivized with an additional suffix.

Meinhof 1930: 108. Quoted as !áí in [Wuras 1920: 25]. As in Nama, this seems to be the main equivalent for the 'abstract goodness' concept, as opposed to ʔĩ́-sá 'pretty, beautiful', with some of its derivates also listed in the meaning 'good' [Meinhof 1930: 80].

Not reconstructible. Despite the deceptive phonetic similarity, these Nama and !Ora items do not properly correspond to each other. Nama !ʼőḿ- 'hand / fist' corresponds not to !Ora 'hand', but to !Ora !ʼum- 'fist' [Meinhof 1930: 107] < Proto-Khoekhoe *!ʼum-, further perhaps to Naro *!ʼum 'wrist', with imprecise and barely reconstructible semantics. As for !Ora !ùm-má 'hand', it has no regular parallels in Nama, but is perfectly compatible with Kalahari Khoe *ɡ!oma 'lower arm, underarm' [Vossen 1997: 498]. While some semantic contaminations between these phonetically and semantically close terms were, of course, possible, it really seems that we are here dealing with two different ways of replacing an original root for 'hand' (which was possibly cognate with Kalahari Khoe *cʰau 'hand'), lost independently in both primary branches of Khoekhoe.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 23. Attested in both the masc. (tȁná-b) and fem. (tȁná-s) genders, although the former variant is more typical of the meaning 'chief, leader', and the latter - of the original meaning 'head'. Quoted as tana-b ~ tana-s in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 355].

Meinhof 1930: 106. Also attested as a compound form: bī=!ʼã̄-b ~ bi=!ʼã-b [Meinhof 1930: 81], whose first component bi= is of an unclear origin. It is this compound form that is apparently quoted as bi=aːm in [Wuras 1920: 27], with elision of the actual click.

Proto-Khoekhoe:

Not properly reconstructible. !Ora !ʼã-b 'head' may be tentatively explained as a nominalization of the verb !ʼã 'to harken, listen' (a typologically odd, but theoretically possible metonymic shift: 'listening' > 'head'); no better etymology has been found so far. As for Nama tȁná-, it has no parallels either in !Ora or in Kalahari Khoe. If it is possible to somehow derive the word from the verb tȁń {dan} 'to win, conquer, defeat, beat, vanquish' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 23], then the meaning 'principal, chief, leader' for the noun tȁná- should be considered primary, and the anatomical meaning secondary.

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: This is quite strictly a verbal root ('to hear'), although in !Ora it would also become, through conversion, the default equivalent for the noun 'ear' q.v.; in Nama the converted noun ɳǀǀã̏ṹ-b is, however, glossed by Haacke & Eiseb as 'hearsay', reflecting a not so far evolved semantic shift.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 390. Attested in both the masc. (ɡǂa̋ó-b) and fem. (ɡǂa̋ó-s) genders. Cf. also the verbal root ɡǂa̋ó 'to want; to desire (to do smth.)' [ibid.]; it is not entirely clear if we should postulate the polysemy 'heart / want, desire', but if so, etymological evidence shows that the verbal meaning is secondary. Quoted as ɡǂao-b 'heart; will (n.)' in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 100].

Distribution: Preserved where attested. Replacements: The word is not attested in any known !Ora sources, so we have no idea whether it was preserved or replaced in that language. However, reconstructibility of the etymon for Proto-Khoekhoe is made certain by the presence of reliable external parallels in Kalahari Khoe (*ɳǀǀa 'horn' in [Vossen 1997: 452]; there are some problems with the nasal vowel in Nama, but it hardly disqualifies the comparison).

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 131. This is the emphatic, non-clitical, form, consisting of the main pronominal morpheme tìi̋ 'I' (cf. also the possessive form: ti̋í 'my' and the object form: -tè 'me'), and an appended emphatic particle -tà, contracted to -r in certain speech contexts. The postverbal short variant of this pronoun is contracted to simply tà 'I' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 127], with the enclitic taking on the functions of the pronoun. However, since the full form is still in regular use, no lexical replacement from Proto-Khoekhoe or Proto-Central Khoisan is postulated. Quoted as ti-ta ~ -ta in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 354, 359].

Meinhof 1930: 43; Wuras 1920: 28. The first form is masculine; the second is feminine. The main pronominal stem ti- is lost in the clitical object forms: re 'me' (masc.), te 'me' (fem.).

Proto-Khoekhoe:*ti-

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects, although with slightly different paradigms. Semantics and structure: It is very difficult to unambiguously extract the original basic shape of the pronominal root. According to Vossen's reconstruction [Vossen 1997: 369], the Proto-Khoe root and its Proto-Khoekhoe descendant are to be reconstructed as *ta, whereas Proto-Khoekhoe *ti= is to be interpreted as an additional pronominal prefix: thus, PKK *ti=ta 'I' (full emphatic stem) is opposed to *ta 'I' (brief clitical stem). The variation in Nama may be accounted for by saying that tìi̋-r is the regular development (< *ti-da < *ti-ta) and tìi̋-tà is a secondary formation by analogy with the clitical stem *ta. It also seems reasonable to regard the masculine / feminine opposition in !Ora as secondary: no other Khoe language has such a contrast in the 1st p. pronoun, and it is theoretically possible to think of a scenario where an "archaic" form might have been retained as the "masculine" variant and an analogically levelled form might be perceived as the "feminine" variant. However, such a solution still has two drawbacks: (a) it does not explain the form tí-ré in !Ora and its odd final vocalism; (b) most importantly, setting up a unique "pronominal prefix of the 1st p." is pretty much the same as setting up an additional pronominal stem. We believe that this was not, in fact, a separate pronominal morpheme, but rather a component of pronominal reduplication, same as in the case of the 2nd p. pr. (q.v.). If so, a possible scenario is: Pre-Proto-Khoekhoe *ti-ti 'I' > Proto-Khoekhoe *ti-de (phonetically = *ti-re) with vocalic dissimilation and/or *ti-da (through levelling with *sa-ca, *sa-sa 'thou' q.v.).

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 308. Polysemy: 'murder / kill / slaughter'. The semantics indicates strongly negative connotations, but there does not seem to be any euphemistic expressions for this meaning that would currently threaten to replace the old word, other than a marginal tȉí-xùű 'to finish off, kill' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 30], literally 'to do-release'. Quoted as ɡ!am in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 89].

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 385. Same word as 'ear' q.v. Attested in the masc. gender (ɡǂàe̋-b), with the semantics of 'elongated leaf', or in the fem. gender (ɡǂàe̋-s), with the semantics of 'roundish leaf'. Quoted as ɡǂai-s in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 98]. Secondary synonym: ɳǂàre̋-b (with a phonetically strange dialectal variant ɳǂàpő-b in the Damara and Haiǀǀom dialects) 'leaf (esp. fine compound, as of acacias)' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 416]; this word is not found in [Krönlein & Rust 1969].

Wuras 1920: 31. Same word as 'ear' q.v. The same word is listed with the meaning 'branch', not 'leaf' in [Meinhof 1930: 117] (ɳǀǀãũ-b or hai-b ɳǀǀãũ-b = 'tree-ear'). In [Wuras 1920: 13], the meaning 'branch' is translated as ɳǀǀãũ-kùa, i. e. the plural form of ɳǀǀãũ-b. This may indicate actual polysemy: 'branch / leaf' in !Ora.

Proto-Khoekhoe:

Not properly reconstructible. In both cases, the word for 'leaf' is the same as the word for 'ear', so it would seem logical to project the more archaic equivalent of the two (*ǂae 'ear' q.v.) onto the proto-level with the meaning 'leaf' as well. However, it is worth noting that external comparison does not support this: the Proto-Kalahari Khoe equivalent for 'leaf' is *ɡǀana [Vossen 1997: 424], corresponding to Proto-Khoekhoe *ǀã 'grass', and it is quite probable that the replacement of the original 'leaf' with 'ear' may have taken place independently in Nama and !Ora already after the disintegration of Proto-Khoekhoe.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 37. Quoted as ga-xu ~ gei-xu in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 67]. Some hard-to-resolve dialectal confusion may be involved here. Haacke & Eiseb list the meanings for this word as 'long (of time/distance), tall (of pers.)', which would indicate its complete eligibility, but also mark it as [D], i. e. representing the Damara dialect rather than Nama proper. Krönlein's dictionary, however, in which this word is also attested in the required meaning 'long', represents Nama, not Damara. Additionally, if kàì-xùű is Damara, not Nama, it is unclear what the Nama equivalent is: the only other possible choice is hõ̏ã̀ 'distant, long (of: distance/road/time), wide' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 53], but no examples for this word confirm that it can refer to long material objects. A brief check of the 95-word diagnostic list for Nama dialects in [Haacke et al. 1997: 175] shows, however, that kai-xu ~ ka-xu is really in use in most of the dialects, including both Central Nama and Damara.

Vossen 1997: 461 (*gaxu). Distribution: Preserved in most dialects. Reconstruction shape: This is a complex bisyllabic / bi-morphemic adjective, evidently prone to assimilative processes. The diphthong in the first syllable, attested in some Nama dialects (and, perhaps, preserved with some mutations also in !Ora kui-hu-b 'length') cannot be explained as a secondary development and has to be projected onto the proto-level; its simplification in daughter dialects is quite expectable in an old compound formation. Semantics and structure: Historically, this seems to be a near-fossilized junction of the verbal-adjectival root 'to grow (up); (to become) big' with the old Khoe terminative verbal suffix *-xu (< Proto-Khoe *xu 'to leave, abandon'), i. e. 'to be long' = 'to have completed the process of growing'.

Meinhof 1930: 88. Literally = 'male' + 'person' q.v. Apparently, the simple masculine stem kʰoe-b can also mean 'man (male human being)' [Meinhof 1930: 86], complicating the choice of the correct synonym. In [Wuras 1920: 34], the meaning 'man' is glossed as kʰoeː-b, but it is not explicated whether the 'man' in question refers to 'male human being' or 'human being (in general)'.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*xʼao-

Vossen 1997: 465 (*kxʼao "männlich"). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (deletion of *xʼ- in Nama is predictable). Semantics and structure: Judging by the situation in !Ora, the original meaning of this root is adjectival ('male'), and the nominal meaning 'man' (= 'male human being') may have already on the Proto-Khoekhoe level been expressed both as *xʼao- and as the masculine form of the nominal root 'person' q.v. (*kʰoe-b). Nevertheless, since the "distilled" meaning of the lexical root *kʰoe- is sexless, whereas the "distilled" meaning of *xʼao- is clearly "masculine", we prefer to choose *xʼao as the base equivalent for 'man' and *kʰoe as the base equivalent for 'person'.

Meinhof 1930: 100. Meinhof lists this form as dubious (concerning his transcription) and points at the phonetic similarity with ǀxʼóá 'full'. In [Wuras 1920: 34], the meaning 'many' is rendered as ǂxʼoa, for some reason, with a palatal instead of the expected dental click. Overall, quite a problematic entry, but in any case, distinct from the Nama equivalent.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*ǂui #

Distribution: Preserved only in Nama. Replacements: Possibly replaced with forms related to the root 'to fill, to be full' in !Ora, but the data are not very reliable. Technically, the proto-slot should have been left empty, but we still tentatively fill it with a potential ancestral form of the Nama equivalent, because (a) the Nama form is reliably attested and is not interpretible as a recent derivate or borrowing; (b) the Nama form has at least some tentative parallels in Kalahari Khoe (e. g. forms that are transcribed as !tui 'many' in Tanaka's dictionary of Gǀwi and Gǀǀana), whereas the dubious forms in !Ora cannot be compared with anything relevant.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 248. Transcribed as ɡǀǀã̏ĩ́-i for the Sesfontein dialect. The form ɡǀǀȁń-i is slightly odd, since the addition of the neuter gender marker -i is usually supposed to trigger prolongation of the final resonant; this "regular" variant, ɡǀǀȁń-ni, is also attested in the dictionary and glossed as '(large piece of) meat; muscle; muscle fiber'. Apparently, it must be older than the relatively new formation ɡǀǀȁń-i, where no morphophonological processes have taken place. Attested also in the fem. gender, as ɡǀǀȁń-s 'piece of meat (of roundish shape)'. Quoted as ɡǀǀan-i ~ ɡǀǀan-s in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 81].

Vossen 1997: 433 (*kxʼo 'to eat meat'). Distribution: Preserved only in !Ora. Replacements: The original root *xʼo- in !Ora behaves more or less the same way as it does in Kalahari Khoe languages, i. e. it is an ambiguous verbal-nominal root, meaning 'to eat hard foot / meat' in the verbal function and simply 'meat, flesh' in the nominal function. In Nama, only the verbal meaning is preserved, cf. òő 'to eat, devour (of carnivores); to eat greedily, devour, gorge' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 102]. The old noun 'meat' from the same root was lost and replaced with ɡǀǀȁń-, possibly some rare dialectism with an initially narrower meaning such as '(large piece of) meat; muscle fiber'; it has no parallels in !Ora or in Kalahari Khoe languages and cannot be projected onto the proto-level.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 176. Same word as 'stone' q.v. With the semantics of 'mountain', the word is more specifically glossed as '(high) mountain' in the masc. gender (ǀʼűí-b) and as '(low, dome-shaped) mountain' in the fem. gender (ǀʼűí-s). Quoted as ǀʼui-b ~ ǀʼui-s in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 369].

Meinhof 1930: 108. In [Wuras 1920: 36], the meaning 'mountain' is rendered as ǀʼuy-b = 'stone' q.v., which agrees better with the lexical usage in Nama. However, since [Meinhof 1930] is our principal source, we have to respect his semantic glossing; it is possible that in the dialect that he was describing the old polysemy was already eliminated.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*ǀʼui-

Vossen 1997: 495 (*ǀʼui 'stone'). Distribution: Preserved in most dialects, but possibly (not certainly) replaced in some of the !Ora ones. Replacements: !Ora !àrè-b 'mountain', as recorded by Meinhof, is clearly cognate with Nama ɡ!àrè-s '(granite) boulder' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 311] and ɡ!are-b 'einzeln stehender Fels' [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 92]. External data and typological considerations show that for Proto-Khoekhoe, it makes more sense to set up the root *ǀʼui- with polysemy: 'stone / mountain', and !Ora !àrè-b would either reflect a generalization of a narrower meaning {'boulder, large rock' > 'mountain'} or could reflect a semantic inaccuracy in Meinhof's notation (cf. the disagreement between Meinhof and Wuras). Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.

Not attested properly. In [Meinhof 1930: 87], the word xʼam-ma, corresponding to Nama a̋ḿ-s 'mouth', is semantically glossed as 'gate'; since the related Nama item is listed there as well by Meinhof as an etymological parallel, it is highly unlikely that the author did not notice its usage in the meaning 'mouth' in !Ora. However, no alternate equivalent for 'mouth' is listed. In [Wuras 1920: 36], the meaning 'mouth' is glossed as am-ma, which poses another problem: Nama a̋ḿ-s definitely goes back to *xʼam-s, in the light of external evidence, but *xʼ- is regularly preserved in !Ora, which means that Wuras' am-ma, if it is not an erroneous transcription, can only be regarded as a borrowing (re-borrowing!) from Nama into !Ora, which is very unusual. All considered, we prefer to leave the slot empty.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*xʼam-

Vossen 1997: 468 (*kxʼam). Distribution: Preserved in Nama; situation in !Ora remains unclear. Replacements: See notes on !Ora; it is unclear if the old word was preserved in this language (remaining unattested) or was replaced by a bizarre re-borrowing from Nama. In any case, the Nama word can safely be projected onto the Proto-Khoekhoe level because of reliable external cognates in Kalahari Khoe.

Meinhof 1930: 106. Meaning glossed as 'nape of the neck'; this and the fact that the click efflux is represented as glottalized instead of the expected velar affricate -xʼ- makes the entry slightly dubious. Cf., however, !xʼau-b 'neck' in [Wuras 1920: 36]; the existence of this form shows that the Meinhof entry may have been incorrectly transcribed.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*!xʼao-

Distribution: Preserved in Nama and possibly in !Ora. Replacements: The situation in !Ora is somewhat unclear. Nama !ʼa̋ó-, as is clearly seen from external (Kalahari Khoe) data, goes back to *!xʼao-, and the same root is clearly seen in Wuras' transcription for !Ora. Meinhof's !ʼáó-b 'nape of the neck' for !Ora can, therefore, only be regarded as irregular - perhaps a Nama form borrowed in some !Ora dialects, if not simply a mistranscription for *!xʼáó-b (this last possibility, coupled with Wuras' attestation, is what makes us tentatively set up a lexicostatistical match between Nama and !Ora in this instance rather than exclude the !Ora item from calculations altogether).

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 165. Final -sȁ is a productive suffix that normally derives adjectives from verbs; the original verbal stem may have been the same as ǀʼáà 'sharp, pointed; acute' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 158]. Some dialectal variety here: Sesfontein and Haiǀǀom dialects use an entirely different word instead (kàwa̋). Quoted as ǀʼa-sa 'new, fresh' in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 15]; the other dialectal equivalent is also included as gawa [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 73].

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The morphologically complex adjectival stem is well reconstructible on the Proto-Khoekhoe level. However, if this is really a historical derivate from the adjective 'sharp, pointed', the situation becomes more complicated. This adjectival stem is to be reconstructed as *ǀxʼa- rather than *ǀʼa- (> Nama ǀʼaː, !Ora ǀxʼa), and then we could only assume the non-inherited status of the word 'new' in !Ora, i.e.: (a) Proto-Khoekhoe *ǀxʼa 'sharp' > Nama ǀʼaː (regularly); (b) derivation of ǀʼaː-sa from ǀʼa in Nama; (c) borrowing of Nama ǀʼaː-sa into !Ora. This is a possible scenario, but since it is hard to conclusively prove that 'new' was really derived from 'sharp', the alternate scenario (a separate root *ǀʼa-) should still be considered.

Meinhof 1930: 92. A compound form, combining the old monosyllabic root 'night' (not preserved in Khoekhoe on its own) with xu-b 'thing, object'. Meinhof also notes that a more rarely used equivalent of the meaning 'night' is !xàì-b [Meinhof 1930: 113] (originally 'darkness' = Nama !xae-b id.). It is this second word, quoted as !xei-b, that is also found in the meaning 'night' in [Wuras 1920: 36].

Proto-Khoekhoe:*tʰu-xu-

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are mostly regular (affricativization *tʰ- > c- in Nama is predictable), although nasalization of the first root vowel in !Ora has not yet been explained. Semantics and structure: The bisyllabic compound stem is reconstructible for Proto-Khoekhoe, although, interestingly, all of its external correlates in Kalahari Khoe are monosyllabic (*tʰǔ 'night' in [Vossen 1997: 470]). The second root *-xu- 'thing' was perhaps added for reasons of reducing homonymy, or as an additional nominalizer if the root originally had verbal semantics ('to be dark'?).

Meinhof 1930: 54-55; Wuras 1920: 37. This is the basic postverbal negative particle for indicative forms. It is distinct from the prohibitive ta and the conditional negative te 'if not...' [Meinhof 1930: 55]. There does not seem to be any distinction between past / present / future negation, as in Nama.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*tama

Vossen 1997: 366 (*tama). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Concerning the opposition between tàmà and ti̋dȅ in Nama, it should be noted that !Ora does not show it, but the same negation marker for the future tense is also encountered outside of Khoekhoe in Naro (títè). This implies that the form should probably be reconstructed both on the Proto-Khoekhoe (preserved in Nama, lost in !Ora) and the Proto-Khoe (preserved in Nama and Naro, lost everywhere else) levels; on the other hand, independent preservation of the form in two of the largest Khoe languages and its disappearance everywhere else also raise suspicion (some areal isogloss?), so, provisionally, we do not reconstruct the ancestor of this form on the Proto-Khoekhoe level.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 132. This is the basic postverbal negative particle for future tense forms. Quoted as tite in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 359]. Since neither tàmà nor ti̋dȅ are properly segmentable on the synchronic level (despite the possibility that word-initial t- in both reflects the same original negative morpheme), we prefer to include them here as suppletive synonyms.

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. For some reason, Vossen only lists the !Ora form for Khoekhoe [Vossen 1997: 429], not mentioning the existence of its perfectly regular and basic Nama correlate; he still has to reconstruct it for the Proto-Khoe level, but lack of mention for the Nama word is very odd.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 72. The meaning 'human being' is carried by the root itself, as well as the neuter gender lexeme kʰȍè-i that it forms. However, it can also denote both 'man' (kʰȍè-b) and 'woman' (kʰȍè-s) in conjunction with the appropriate masc. and fem. gender suffixes, even though there are other, lexically specific, terms for these meanings as well (see under 'man' and 'woman'). Quoted as kʰoi- (kʰoi-i, kʰoi-b, kʰoi-s) in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 238].

Meinhof 1930: 86. The actual attested forms are: kʰoe-b ~ kʰoe-b-i 'man (male)'; kʰoeː-s 'woman'. No neuter gender form, corresponding to Nama kʰȍè-i, is attested, but this may simply be a defect of Meinhof's small vocabulary. In any case, there are no other morphemes known in !Ora to which the meaning 'human being' could be ascribed.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 168. Quoted as ǀʼawi-b in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 17]. According to Haacke & Eiseb's dictionary, this word is currently the main equivalent for the noun 'rain' in Nama proper, being a recent nominalization of the verbal stem ǀʼàwi̋ ~ ǀʼàpi̋ 'to rain'. The older nominal equivalent (its antiquity is proven by external correspondences) is tűú-s, still preserved in its basic meaning in the Damara, Topnaar, and Bondelzwarts dialects [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 134]; accordingly, in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 361], reflecting Central Nama, we find tuː 'to rain' and tuː-b 'rainclouds', but not *tuː-s 'rain'. A third dialectal equivalent is ɳǀànű-b 'rain, thunderstorm' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 221], also serving as the basic term for 'rain' in some dialects. The complete dialectal picture is presented in [Haacke et al. 1997: 184].

Vossen 1997: 477 (*tu). Distribution: Replaced in some Nama dialects, including Nama proper, with the root ǀʼawi-, of unclear origin; however, both the internal distribution of cognate forms and the external Kalahari Khoe parallels transparently indicate that *tu- is the original root in the basic meaning 'rain'. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.

Meinhof 1930: 107. Quoted as !ʼum dorro in [Wuras 1920: 44] (the form dorro is unclear).

Proto-Khoekhoe:

Not properly reconstructible. Several attested roots (2 in Nama, 1 in !Ora) all share structural similarities (palatal or alveolar click + zero or glottal stop efflux + labial vowel + labial coda), but do not correspond to each other regularly. Considering possibilities of irregular sound-symbolic developments, as well as lack of substantial hints from external comparison, it is best to avoid setting up any tentative reconstructions.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 325. Meaning glossed as 'round, spherical'. Quoted as ɡ!uwu in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 147]. Despite the remarkable phonetic similarity between the two words for 'round', they are not etymologically relatable in a standard manner (there may, however, be grounds for some speculation on "phonosemantics" involved in this case).

Distribution: Preserved in !Ora, with a possible semantic narrowing in Nama. Replacements: In most languages of the Khoisan area, basic 'sand' is usually indistinguishable from 'earth', including Kalahari Khoe languages. In Khoekhoe (possibly because of their strong agricultural / pastoralist connections), the situation is different; however, 'sand' still remains an unstable concept. Judging by the semantic definitions in Haacke & Eiseb's dictionary, it seems that the basic term for 'sand' as a substance in Nama is ɡǀòwa̋-; the quasi-synonym ǀǀxàe̋-b, dealing exclusively with sand found on riverbanks (or at the bottom of the river), is narrower than required. On the other hand, this latter term is the only word for 'sand' known in !Ora, and thus, in terms of cognate distribution, the optimal candidate for generic 'sand' in Proto-Khoekhoe. However, this is a provisional solution that rests on possible incompleteness or inaccuracy of our knowledge of !Ora lexicon, and since external comparison is unable to help, the reconstruction remains questionable.

Vossen 1997: 490 (lists forms for Nama and !Ora but, for some reason, does not put up a Proto-Khoekhoe reconstruction). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: This verbal root (also preserved as such in Kalahari Khoe) additionally forms the base for the derived noun 'eye' q.v.

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are generally trivial (in Nama *-um- > -om-, which seems to be a regular process; cf. notes on 'hand' for another etymology with the same development).

Vossen 1997: 491 (*ɳǂu ~ *ɳǂũ). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial, except for the yet-to-be-explained fluctuation between the nasal and non-nasal quality of the root vowel (a rather frequent phenomenon in Khoe).

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 239. To be more precise, ǀǀʼóm̀ as such is glossed as 'fall asleep, drop off'; the static 'be sleeping' is ǀǀʼóm̀ hã̀ã̏ (for the meaning of the latter auxiliary verb, see under 'sit'). Quoted as ǀǀʼom in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 322].

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 408. Quoted as ǂari in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 232]. The latter source also mentions the existence of the word ɡǀaː 'small; to be small' [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 74], even illustrated by a few text examples. Haacke & Eiseb do not find any evidence for it in the 20th century language, but etymological parallels (in !Ora) confirm that this was indeed an older word for 'small', apparently still in some usage (perhaps already restricted) in the 20th century, but no longer today.

Vossen 1997: 457 (*ǀa). Distribution: Preserved everywhere until recently, but seems to have been completely replaced in 20th century Nama. Replacements: Replaced in modern Nama by ǂxàri̋, a word of unknown origin (no parallels in !Ora or in Kalahari Khoe). Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 82. The word has both a dynamic meaning ('come to a standstill, stop, pause') and a static one ('to stand'); the latter may historically represent a phonetic merger of mã́ã́ + hã̀ã̏ (see under 'sit' for further notes on this auxiliary verb). Quoted as mã in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 261].

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Not mentioned in [Vossen 1997], since the etymon is an exclusive Khoekhoe isogloss, without any parallels in Kalahari Khoe.

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and generally trivial (the second vowel of the verbal stem is either assimilated or deleted in various subdialects of !Ora). Semantics and structure: Already in Proto-Khoekhoe this word was a transparent derivative of the verb 'to blink; to twinkle'. However, it is important to note that the older word for 'star' was retained in Nama with a specific narrowing of the semantics: ǀxìni̋-ni̋-s ~ ǀxìnĩ̀ĩ́-s ~ ǀxĩ̀ĩ́ni̋-s 'morning star' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 214] (cf. Kalahari Khoe *ǀxani 'star').

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 176. Same word as 'mountain' q.v. With the semantics of 'stone', the word is more specifically glossed as '(longish) stone/rock' in the masc. gender (ǀʼűí-b) and as '(roundish) stone/rock' in the fem. gender (ǀʼűí-s). Quoted as ǀʼui-b ~ ǀʼui-s in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 369].

Vossen 1997: 488 (*cáó). Distribution: Preserved in !Ora. Replacements: !Ora sáó-b 'tail' has a verbal correlate, sáó 'to follow', which is still well preserved in Nama: sa̋ó 'to follow, go/come behind' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 110]. Internal data might suggest that the verbal meaning was original (with an innovation in !Ora and preservation of the old 'tail' in Nama), but external data (Proto-Kalahari Khoe *cáó 'tail') shows that the opposite process was more likely, i. e. that Proto-Khoekhoe already had the polysemy: 'tail / to follow', and Nama only retained the verbal meaning, replacing the original 'tail' with a special, newly-formed masculine form ('tail' = 'smth. long') of the feminine ǂʼa̋ré-s 'buttock' (= 'smth. round'). Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 284. Used in adjectival ('that', 'those') as well as adverbial ('there') functions; may also be nominalized as ɳǀǀàa̋-b (masc.), ɳǀǀàa̋-s (fem.). Quoted as ɳǀǀa in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 272]. In some sources (e. g., Hagman's grammar of Nama) the language is described as having a three-way distinction in the demonstrative system, including an "intermediate" stage between 'this' (near) and 'that' (far). However, the word that is ascribed that meaning, na̋ú, is glossed in [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 96] as '(the) other (specific), the alternative', and seems actually to belong to a somewhat different paradigm; we do not include it in the final list.

Vossen 1997: 378 (*ne). Distribution: Preserved only in Nama. Replacements: The situation with the proximal deictic stem in Khoekhoe is more complicated than the situation with the distal stem (*ɳǀǀa). Nama nȅè and !Ora he- do not correspond to each other, and neither of the two words finds good etymological parallels in the other language, so, technically, both are eligible for proto-status. External comparison with Kalahari Khoe *ɳǀé 'this' does not yield a fully reliable etymological cognate either, but it is admissible to assume an irregular instance of click loss in Nama: *ɳǀe > *ne, due to the frequency of usage and specific samdhi-like processes that are typical of pronominal stems. In this case, the Nama pronoun should be regarded as going back to Proto-Khoekhoe, and the !Ora form should be regarded as an innovation (of unknown origin). However, this is a provisional decision, still liable to future amendments.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 108. The pure stem of this pronoun is sa, attested as the possessive adjective 'your'. The listed two forms represent, respectively, the masc. and fem. variants, although it should be noted that the masculine suffix -c (unlike the feminine -s) is certainly not productive and represents an important archaism. Quoted as sa-c / sa-s in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 338].

Meinhof 1930: 43. The pure stem of this pronoun is sa, attested as the possessive adjective 'your'. The listed two forms represent, respectively, the masc. and fem. variants (see notes on Nama).

Proto-Khoekhoe:*sa=c / *sa=s

Vossen 1997: 370 (masc.: *c, fem.: *s). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: On a purely synchronic level, the full stems of the 2nd p. sg. pronoun could be analyzed as consisting of the root *sa-, combining with either the masculine suffix *-c or the feminine suffix *-s. However, (a) in most other contexts, such as the clitical forms of the same pronouns, or their object variants, the "root" is completely eliminated; (b) there is no masculine suffix *-c in Nama or !Ora (the regular masculine suffix is *-b). Therefore, what we really are dealing with is most likely the result of original reduplication: masc. *ca-ca > *sa-c (with reduction of the last syllable and dissimilation of two affricates), fem. *sa-sa > *sa-s (with reduction). This is a peculiarity of the Khoekhoe system that does not have any parallels in Kalahari Khoe languages, and it may also be observed for the 1st p. pronoun (q.v.) as well. Consequently, we separate the first CV- sequence as the result of reduplication and emphasize the =c / =s opposition as more closely reflecting the original situation in Proto-Khoe (and more closely matching external data).

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: The obvious issue here is with the initial consonant, reflected rather chaotically as t-, n-, or l- across various Nama dialects. The presence of t- in !Ora would suggest that the dental stop reflex is more archaic, and this is also phonetically closer to the related Kalahari Khoe equivalent *dam- [Vossen 1997: 510], without any such fluctuations. However, even so, voiceless t- in !Ora is not a regular correspondence for Kalahari Khoe *d-. Existing evidence, therefore, strongly suggests either an "exotic" reconstruction for Proto-Khoekhoe and Proto-Khoe, or an irregular "expressive" set of developments in Khoekhoe (typologically not unusual for the word 'tongue'). However, it should also be noted that this kind of fluctuation is not exclusively limited to the word 'tongue' in Nama: cf., for instance, Nama náwà ~ táwà 'to strike of lightning', lápà-b ~ napa-b ~ tapa-b '(flash of) lightning' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 97]. Cases like these definitely exclude a reconstruction with *t- (because numerous items that begin with *t- show no traces of such a fluctuation) and increase the probability of a rare word-initial resonant like *l- having been present at the proto-level, with various accommodations depending on the dialect.

Meinhof 1930: 84. Fem. gender. In Meinhof's dictionary, the word is only found in the meaning 'bush' (no alternate equivalent for 'tree' is offered). However, in [Wuras 1920: 53], the same root is glossed as 'tree', with the word attested in the masc. gender: hei-b. Most likely, the situation in !Ora was more or less the same as in Nama (fem. gender = 'wide and large tree / bush', masc. gender = '(elongated) tree').

Proto-Khoekhoe:*hai-

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.

Not properly reconstructible, although the Nama word is probably more archaic than the one in !Ora: its cognates in Kalahari Khoe mean 'sun, day' and could very easily have been derived from the original meaning 'to be hot'.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 246. Quoted as ɡǀǀam-i in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 80]. The Sesfontein dialect also has a strange variant tàm̋-mi, unexplainable as a regular phonetic development. The Haiǀǀom dialect is particularly important here because it preserves the archaic word for 'water', cȁà-b, which in all the other dialects has only been retained in the meaning 'saliva; dribble, drivel, slobber; synovial fluid' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 135].

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects except for Haiǀǀom. Technically, since Haiǀǀom cȁà- finds obvious parallels in Kalahari Khoe languages, one could hypothesize that the proper Proto-Khoekhoe word for 'water' was *ca, and that *ǀǀam- was a subsequent areal innovation that replaced the old word in most dialects. An alternate scenario, however, would see Haiǀǀom cȁà- as a substrate leftover from an earlier form of speech: considering the background of the Haiǀǀom as hunter-gatherers rather than pastoralists, it is possible that they used to speak a Kalahari Khoe form of a speech before shifting to a Khoekhoe variety, but preserving a small layer of Kalahari Khoe lexical elements. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.

Vossen 1997: 234. The Nama paradigm for the 1st p. plural/dual is extremely complex, altogether containing no less than twelve different forms (a few of them syncretized). The typical form consists of three "slots": (1) clusivity (prefixation of sá= for inclusive forms and of sí= for exclusive forms; in the short clitical variants these prefixes are deleted); (2) gender (masc., fem., neuter); (3) main pronominal morpheme: =m̏ for the dual, =è for the plural. Hence, the dual paradigm is as follows: sá=xʼ=m̏ 'incl. masc.', sá=m̏ 'incl. fem.' + 'incl. neuter', sí=xʼ=m̏ 'excl. masc.', sí=m̏ 'excl. fem.' + 'excl. neuter'.

Meinhof 1930: 43. As in Nama, the complete paradigm of the 1st p. pl./du. pronoun in !Ora consists of twelve different forms (unlike Nama, none of them are syncretized) with the same three slots: clusivity, gender, main pronominal morpheme: =m for the dual, =eː for the plural. The complete paradigm for the dual number is as follows: sa=kʰa=m 'incl. masc.', sa=sa=m 'incl. fem.', sa=m 'incl. neuter', si=kʰa=m 'excl. masc.', si=sa=m 'excl. fem.', si=m 'excl. neuter'.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*=m

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Semantics and structure: The pronominal morpheme *=m is clearly reconstructible as the base marker for 1st p. dual on the evidence of both Nama and !Ora.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 130. Main inanimate interrogative pronoun; should be distinguished from mã̀ã̋, which generally assumes adjectival functions ('which?', 'what kind of?') [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 82] and is not eligible for inclusion. Typically used in conjunction either with the indefinite morpheme -ì (ta̋ré-i) or gender suffixes. Quoted as tare- in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 356]; apparently, the variant ta̋é is "lenited" and less archaic than tare-.

Meinhof 1930: 91. Quoted as tai-b in [Wuras 1920: 56]. Formally, a masc. sg. nominal (which is strange, since the masc. gender ending would not be generally expected in an interrogative referring to inanimate objects).

Proto-Khoekhoe:*da-

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: The root here is apparently the same as in 'who', with regular devoicing in Nama, but irregular in !Ora (where the original opposition between voiced and voiceless consonants is still preserved, unlike in Nama where its only vestiges are tonal). It cannot even be excluded that !Ora táēː- is the result of areal diffusion of a Nama-like variant: in Nama *da-re > *ta̋-re > (dial.) ta̋-e with lenition, and it is this latter and seemingly innovative variant that is also observed in !Ora.

Meinhof 1930: 93. Quoted as xatiː in [Wuras 1920: 57]. A strange word, without external parallels and with a violation of the general phonotactic laws of !Ora (intervocalic -t- rather than the expected -r-); however, no obvious sources of borrowing are attested.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*!ʼuri #

Distribution: Preserved only in Nama. The more archaic nature of the Nama entry is confirmed by external parallels in Kalahari Khoe, although Proto-Kalahari Khoe *!ʼu 'white' necessitates the historical interpretation of -ri in Nama as a suffixal extension. The entry in !Ora, by comparison, not only lacks any reliable external cognates, but does not even look like a native Khoekhoe word in terms of phonotactics.

Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 130. Quoted as tari- in [Krönlein & Rust 1969: 356]. Secondary synonym: ha̋ḿ, also glossed as 'who?' by Haacke & Eiseb without indicating the difference (nor is it clear from R. Hagman's grammar of Nama). Typically used in conjunction either with the indefinite morpheme -ì (tàri̋-i) or gender suffixes.

Meinhof 1930: 46. Formally, a masc. sg. nominal (the corresponding fem. form *da-s or *da-s-i is not attested).

Proto-Khoekhoe:*da-

Vossen 1997: 380 (*da). Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular. Semantics and structure: The root *da- is the same as in 'what?' q.v. It is unclear what was the specific shape of the animate pronoun in Proto-Khoekhoe: !Ora suggests simple *da-, while Nama points to *da-ri (with the simplified variant *da-i probably resulting from irregular loss of the intervocalic resonant in a high-frequency auxiliary word). !Ora *da-bi is also technically analyzable as the result of a similar irregular loss of the intervocalic resonant (*da-ri > *da-i, cf. 'what?') with subsequent addition of the masculine suffix (*da-i-b) and metathesis (> da-b-i).

Meinhof 1930: 91. Secondary synonym: kʰoeː-s 'woman' ([Meinhof 1930: 88]; [Wuras 1920: 57]), i. e. the feminine form of kʰoe- 'person' q.v. Scant textual evidence shows that in contexts where 'woman' and 'man' are found together, the speakers prefer not to rely exclusively on gender markers (kʰoe-b vs. kʰoe-s), but to at least use compound forms such as xʼao-kʰoe-b 'male person' and tara-kʰoe-s 'female person', which justifies the inclusion of tara-s in the basic meaning 'woman'.

Proto-Khoekhoe:*tara-

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: Already on the Proto-Khoekhoe level, *tara- must have been a partial synonym with *kʰoe-s, the feminine gender form of *kʰoe- 'person'. Whereas this second form also serves as the default equivalent for 'woman' in Kalahari Khoe, *tara- has no equivalent outside of Khoekhoe, and it currently remains unclear if the original situation was closer to the one in Khoekhoe or in the Kalahari branch.

Not reconstructible. Nama !ʰȕnì 'yellow' has no parallels either in !Ora or in Kalahari Khoe, so the degree of its archaicity remains completely unclear. As for !Ora ǀʰāī, it corresponds regularly to Nama ǀʰȁí 'grey, ash-coloured' [Haacke & Eiseb 2002: 199], making the semantics of this word in Proto-Khoekhoe quite fuzzy. We prefer to leave the slot empty.

Meinhof 1930: 99. The actual adjective 'near' is not attested; the stem is known from such derivatives as ǀu-ǀu 'to bring near' and ǀu-eː 'to approach, get near'. However, in [Wuras 1920: 36], 'near' is glossed as ǀu-seː, which confirms that this root should be included on the list.

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: This word has the explicit meaning 'thin (2D)' in Nama; however, since ɡǀǀàá 'thin (1D)' has no parallels either in !Ora or in Kalahari Khoe, it is unclear if this semantic opposition was lexicalized on the Proto-Khoekhoe level or if it is a Nama innovation.

Distribution: Preserved in all dialects. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (*ǂxʼ- > ǂʼ- in Nama is predictable; *o > u in Nama due to the influence of the front vowel in the second syllable).